it is kent conrad's model something that your colleagues are taking a look at, that even has any chance of passing the house? if not, i guess given that the senate is not looking at a medicare model for the public plan, how do the two changers' bridge -- how do the two chambers bridge your differences on that point? guest: i use medicare as an example because people familiar with it. i think the people that fear a public plan are afraid that it is going to be all paid for by the federal government, it is not going to make a profit, and the federal government is going to favor it in many ways as possible so that there is not a level playing field. what we have said and what i have said is that you have to create a level playing field. for example, the public plan has to rely on premiums of the people that are purchasing it, just like a private plan. it cannot be subsidized by the federal government. you know, basically you say that whether it is advertising, whether it is subsidization, whether it is -- whether certain doctors participate, all these things are made the same between the p

and the debt as senator conrad says it the threat. i just would ask we support this amendment obviously. >> if i can, just to express a point on that. whether it's the gao or the cbo or -- these are not policy making bodies and we are. we can debate about whether or not an investment in some aspect of quality is a good decision or not a good decision. i would be reluctant to set the precedent of giving an outside organization to have the ability to cancel the program because they've conclude that's it might have a cost associated with it. that's really our function as a body here as well as a finance committee to make those determinations. it's been a general conclusion over the last number of months as we've had a number of hearings and working groups that we clearly are going to bend the curve down, it is going to be in the area of prevention and quality, not quantity as has dominated the health care, how much people are in a doctor's office, in a hospital that determine the sick care system. we're all interested in keeping people o

but senator conrad has never been the problem here. he's been well open to negotiating on how to make a co-op plan have the kind of clout to go up against the private insurance companies, be available to all americans, be able to bargain with the providers and be ready to go on day one to compete with the large nationwide insurance companies. senator conrad has always been willing to entertain all of that. he has been a good-faith negotiator with the best interests at heart. it has been those on the other side of the aisle who have not been willing to negotiate. and so i'm losing confidence that senate republicans will ever agree to the types of changes to a co-op to make it a viable alternative, a viable substitute to a traditional public plan that is nationwide and available to everybody, that can go up against the private insurers and go up against the suppliers in buying power and that is formulated so that it hits the ground running on day one of the insurance exchange. we can only bend so much to try to win over opponents of heal

i am not convinced that the conrad plan will do that.f i were convinced it would, i would look to support something like that but the public auction has those features. >> are you satisfied with the way the president is selling this and going at town in that fashion? >> it is assertiveness about the public auction was perfect guest today. -- yesterday. >> thanks. >> here is our present policy. we are anxious and eager to stop the bombing just as we're eager to stop the war. >> television conversation from the final months of lyndon johnson's presidency and troubles for his pick for supreme court chief justice. listen saturday morning at 10:00 eastern on c-span radio, online, and on xm 132. >> every weekend, the latest nonfiction books and authors. saturday, how do run for congress with $7,000 and your sixth grade students managing the campaign? she is interviewed by eleanor holmes norton. joel rosenberg takes you inside the resolution. -- revolution. what is next for the economy? taxes and the end of prosperity. finally, foreclosure nati

this letter was to senator conrad and myself in response to our request, senator conrad and myself, how you actually contain costs and their point and i will read one headline the letter is fascinating because it does go into what you have to do to contain costs large reductions in spending will not actually be achieved without fundamental changes in the financing and delivery of health care. the government can spur the changes by transforming payment policies and federal health care programs and by significantly limited threat tax subsidy for health insurance. what they are saying is you've got to incentivize quality and cost for a payment system and you've got to be sent to fisa over utilization by not using a tax law which encourages over utilization. and yet, as i look at this proposal, there is nothing that addresses those points made by cbo as the way you start to bend the cost curve as is becoming the nomenclature of the time. interestingly enough, the president has sent to us a series of suggestions how you could best do the reimbursement issue side. they represent -- three digi

senator conrad unveiled a co-op plan for the finance committee. this is what senator gregg said about it. senator conrad has put out a very interesting idea involving co-ops. there are other groups working around this building that are thinking in a more constructive way about how you get to a plan that would be bipartisan. what you think about a co-op plan that will be nonprofit that will allow for consumers to choose. >> there is a lot of work that needs to go into this idea. it is interesting. i am sure that in the coming weeks, there will be more developed. we can take a look and see how this idea will work. we have had things like multi employer welfare arrangements that were operated properly that turned out to be a very big problem. -- that were not operated properly entered into beat -- and turned out to be a very big problem. as a see more details, we will have more to comment on. thank you. >> coming up tonight on c-span, bank of america ceo ken lewis testified on capitol hill about his company's merger with merrill lynch. then, presiden

that is why i introduced comparative act research in 2008 as mark said along with my colleague kent conrad. he and i share a passion for this. we believe it is fundamental to transforming our health system from one that is volume-driven to one that is evidence-based. there are many, many other components of moving that direction but comparative effectiveness research is clearly a part of it. this year we plan to reintroduce the bill. we've been discussing it constantly with staffs and the committee and elsewhere. we're close to coming to an agreement and that's important because i intend to include my bill that is the comparative effectiveness bill in a comprehensive health reform bill that we'll mark up in the finance committee later this month. and that brings me to my last point. the need for comprehensive health reform. the finance committee has spent many hours, many days, weeks, months laying the groundwork. you have 12 hearings last year all day summit at the library of congress we held three round table discussions outlining options for reform. totally inclusive, totally bipartisan

this was with senator conrad and myself and it was in response to my question of senator conrad and myself about how you would retain costs and their point and i would read one line in this. it does go into what you can do to contain it. large reductions in spending will not actually be achieved without fundamental changes in the financing and delivery of health care. the government can spur those changes by transforming payment policies and federal health care programs and by significantly limiting the current tax subsidy for health insurance. what they're saying is that you've got to incentivize quality and cost through payment system and you've got to decent viez over not having the tax law in overutilization. and yet as i look at this proposal there is nothing in it that addssees those two points made by cbo as you start and then the cost curve that has become the nomenclature of the time. interestingly enough, the president has sent us to a series of suggestions as to how you could best do the reimbursement issue side. they represent on $350 billion of potential reductions in the cost

dorgan and conrad appreciate that as a resource to their state, even though they are democrats who you may ordinarily put on the other side of the column when it comes to oil and gas production issues, this will come down to, who they represent and the industry that provides for jobs and resources. this is making certain that the amendments are balanced, you may be able to claim their support if this is balanced. >> are there any other changes to the energy bill? >> i do not know if there is anything -- the amendment list is -- everything that we had out there was clear for withdrawn. >> to clarify something do you think that for the colleagues that this is a package deal, or is this enough to bring more votes? >> this i do not know. you are never quite certain how deep the line is that has been drawn in the sand. i feel so strongly that in order to get meaningful production, the revenue sharing has to be part of the deal. but sometimes, sometimes you have to effect -- except this now to do this later. i do not know if this is how this will play out. i have not given up on the alaskan

host: in your july article you right, every week there is another max baucus, another can conrad and ben nelson huffing and puffing that we better forget about single payer health care, carbon tax, nationalizing the banks, funding for mass transit, these are men with tiny constituencies who have been in the senate for decades without doing a thing. these are the worst abuses of the bush administration who have come forward now to check the president for trying to do too much. guest: this is just one of the things, to see all of these people suddenly take the lead. people like max blog was -- bacchus, well who are they to say single payer is off the table? the idea that things will even get debated because a senator from a state where the jackrabbits outnumber the people, it is not even clear he is representing his own people without the lobby is behind him. this is something that will have to be reined in. i don't see any leadership in the senate. i don't think anybody quite knows what harry reid is doing, or what direction he is pushing anybody. it is a sad thing to see. it is erodi

doing a terrific job in advancing their oil and gas reserves, and i think senator dorgan and senator conrad also from a north dakota appreciate that as a resource to their states, -- their state, so even though they are democrats, even though you might ordinarily put on the other side of a column, when it comes to oil and gas production issues -- i think, again, it comes down to who they represent and the industries that provide for jobs and resources, so i think it is making sure that amendments are good and balanced, and we might be able to claim their support. >> do you expect any further changes into the bill? >> i do not think there is anything -- our amendment list is getting to be pretty trashed. no, it looks like everything we had out there was cleared or withdrawn. >> center, just to clarify something. -- senator, just to clarify something. revenue sharing. does it have to be both? >> that, i do not know. again, you are never quite sure how deep that line is that was drawn in the sand. i feel so strongly that in order to get meaningful production that that revenue sharing has got t

senator conrad brought it up as you know, from north dakota and can you give us a few minutes? >> not particularly. i would rather have one of my colleagues here who is closer to that conversation but let me set it up with a sense to a bridge to many of the concerns that people fear that i think you will take us to in just a second so what about mental health? i am struck is a comparison with 1993 and today the contrast between we know now that was not going to happen on the one hand. on the other hand, we have a task force led by mrs. gore focusing 100% on mental health issues but this time around these folks are much more knowledgeable seem to think it will happen and i cannot identify one person who is in all the central in these conversations. it is not necessarily a bad things that parity has now been established and a lot of the land. but i still gets a little nervous because the most recent piece of big legislation that i have passed, the recovery act, if you said one doesn't and economic depression -- depression has anything like clinical depression, how much specific t

and i think senator dorgan and senator conrad also from north dakota appreciate that as a resource to their state. so even they are democrats who are, you might ordinarily put on the other side of the column when it comes to oil and gas production issues, i think again it comes down to who they represent and the industries that provide for jobs and resources. so i think it's making sure that amendments are good and balanced and might be able to claim your support. >> over your. >> do you expect any further changes of the carbon capture title of the energy bill? >> i don't think there is anything -- our amendment list is getting to be pretty trashed. no, it looks like everything we had out there was either cleared or withdrawn. >> to clarify something, do you think that's where a lot of your college on the republican side of the packaging deal it has to be both, or simply you just need to bring more votes on that? >> that, i don't know. that i don't know. and again, you're never quite sure how deep that line that has been drawn in the sand. for me, i feel so strongly that in order to g

senator conrad unveiled a co-op plan in the finance committee, and this is what senator greg said about it. senator gregg put out a bill involving co-ops, so there were people thinking in a plan -- thinking about a plan that would be bipartisan. what do you think about a plan that would allow consumers to choose? >> i think there is a lot of work that needs to go into this idea. it is interesting. i'm sure that in the coming weeks there is going to be more developed so that we can take a look and see what is this idea and how would it work. we've had things like mewa's, multiemployer welfare arrangements that were not regulated and turned out to be a very big problem. so when you begin to look at what kind of co-op and what kind of pooling they are talking about it, as we have more details, we will have more to comment on. >> thank you. >> more non-fiction books all weekend. inside the revolution. how the followers of gee hawed, jenniferson, and jesus are looking to dominate the world. also ahead, arthur lapper on taxes and the end of prosperity. and later, foreclosure nation. the housi

could add more credence to an insurance co-op proposal offered by senate budget committee chairman conrad as an alternative. so we don't know, is it $1.5 trillion? is it $1 trillion? we don't know. in an offhand comment that may or may not be private, but i don't think anymore anything should be private in regard to health care reform, the chairman said it was a response to senator snowe, how can we vote for this bill in committee if we don't know how much it will cost and how it will merge with the help committee bill? basically the answer coming back is, this bill isn't going to be written here. it isn't going to be written in committee, but it will be written in conference. that's called "trust me." i don't see how we can have much trust when the hel when the emps no closed. i yiel yield back the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from pennsylvania. mr. casey: i guess we are not in a quorum call. the presiding officer: we're not. mr. casey: i ask consent that i be permitted to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. casey: and i

in a secret agent by joseph conrad, everybody is a police spy. the attacks are run out of the russian embassy. in chester sins demands thursday, each man named after the day of the week. they're all police bias so there are lots of anarchists but the ones like emile that you had to watch other was bouncing back and forth between london, the harder they entered his committee ironically enough is parts and elegant part of london now charlotte street and all of that but that was very poor, the autonomy club on windmill street. two those of the ones you have to watch and so he becomes one of the individualist groups of anarchists, that is the bombers. prop propaganda by the deed as opposed to the association who would be the future. after all of that. now he had killed before in 1892. in 1892 at 11 avenue which is still there, i have gone into various times, they found a package in front of a the carmaux mining company. there were big time strikes in the town in the south of france with a great socialist on the 31st of july in 1914 lived. they found

senator conrad has really been a leader on the issue of dead and this government and the fact that thedead is the threat has become really a watchword for us. unfortunately beyond not doing well by the police he has the point down. was advised by cbo and myself in a letter that they wrote and i will quote it briefly in the record that the rising cost of health care will cause federal spending to grow putting the federal budget on an unsustainable path. to quote again the federal budget is on unsustainable path. >> we have 12 members present -- i think the amendment we discuss this senator mikulski and recommended as well as senator reid is senator enzi and the two amendments by senator greg and senator mikulski, they have been agreed to on both sides and i ask unanimous consent those amendments adopted -- without objection is so ordered. >> that is a good start mr. chairman. [laughter] >> we have gotten five done -- we are debating senator greg amendment number 35. >> so this amendment addresses that issue of spending because as we know this bill has been scored only a sixth score beca

. >> you wrote about one element of the emerging plan that is kent conrad ' alternative to a system run by the government. how would that work? >> it remains to be seen exactly. the senate bridge -- there is supposed to be a bridge for the plan. instead of a public plan like a government run insurance co., is essentially what the public plan would be. he is offering to help create cooperatives that are similar to credit unions. they have some rules that make it a lot easier for customers to deal with and make it more price conscious. they do not have the same business pressures as private companies in terms of profit making. they are not government entities, and would be much more fair and how they competed with private insurance companies. that is what these medical cooperatives would be theoretically. some democrats were willing to take a look at that idea. they were trying to decide how the government would run the cooperatives themselves, which are causing republicans to say that is just like having a government-run private plan. even if you call it a cooperative. we are not interes

think about that, and if you do not get your way -- >> i intend to reach out to senator conrad and others that have talked about it. where we live, the idea of co- ops is not an unusual idea. i like to see what they're thinking about there. it depends on how -- whether they would be reasonable competitor or not. remember, there will be people saying that there will not be enough competitors. they said the same thing with prescription drugs. the day that the program started, there are too many competitors and people will not be able to choose. no one underestimates the marketplace dynamics. you do not want to underestimate the kinds of things mr. camp just mentioned. if you expand family coverage to people who are out of school and have not yet found a job, it includes insurance to keep them on family coverage. if you made it more likely that people who could have insurance at work sign up for it, that is 10 million. suddenly, you're taking big chunks of numbers out of the government's responsibility and putting them back where individuals can be responsible for their own health care. the

. >> senator conrad unveiled a co-on plan last night of the finance committee. this is what senator greg said about it. it is an interesting idea involving co-ops. there are others thinking in a more constructive way about how you get to a plan that would be bipartisan. what do you think about a co-op plan that would be nonprofit that would allow consumers to choose -- >> i think there is a lot of work that needs to go into this idea. it is interesting, i'm sure that in the coming weeks there is going to be more developed so that we can take a look and see what is this idea and how would it work? you know, we have had -- we've had things like mpwr that were not regulated properly that turned out to be a very big problem. so when -- you begin to look at what kind of co-ops, what kind of groupings, poolings are you talking about, we'll have more to comment on as we see more details. thank you. >> this week on news makers. we talked to senator jon kyl of arizona. we look at the nomination of judge sonia sotomayer. the government funding of college is direct aid to

. >> you wrote about one element of the plan and that is senator kent conrad, what alternative to a system run by the government -- how would that work? >> it remains to be seen exactly, the senate budget chairman has tried to bridge the divide of the public plan and he has offered an idea that instead of a neighbor of a plan like a government-run insurance company, which is essentially what the public plan would be, he is offering to create or help create cooperatives that are similar to credit unions. they have some rules that make them a lot easier for customers to deal with that make them more price conscious, they don't have the same pressures, business pressures as private companies in terms of profit-making but by the same token they are not government entities and therefore would be much more fair in how they competed with private insurance companies of that is what these medical cooperatives would be theoretically although some democrats who are willing to take a look at that idea are trying to design them in such a way that the government would essentially run the cooperatives th

advocate for comparative effectiveness research downright, sponsoring his own legislation with senator conrad in the last congressional session and including provisions to address the inappropriate use of cost information in the comparative effectiveness research. in addition to this he finds time per ultramarathons which is pretty good preparation for what he's trying to accomplish now. senator baucus, we're pleased to have you back at brookings institute for this opening keynote. [applause] >> thank you, mark, very much and thank you very much for inviting me to your session today to talk about an issue i think a great chance a primitive and that is compared -- that is comparative effectiveness research. santi in dallas $0.1, and men alike shopping they would call it research. [laughter] think about it. from cars to television when americans go shopping there rarely able to evaluate information about the quality and effectiveness of anything but also for health care. and why should americans have information on what works and what doesn't? when it comes to their health that question is espe

could give us at least, i think we ought to spend at least two minutes on it because it is, senator conrad maginot brought up from the dakota and i think in you give us a few minutes no. >> not particularly, i actually would rather have one of my colleagues here who is closer to that conversation, but let me set it up in the sense with a bridge to the concerns to many of the people here that i think probably you are going to take is doing just a second, ron, so what about mental health in all this. i'm really struck as a comparison with 1993 and today the contrast between we know now that that wasn't going to happen on the one hand. on the other hand, we had a task force led by mrs. gore that was focusing 100% on mental health issues. this time around as these folks were much more knowledgeable about it than i seem to believe we think it's going to happen and i can't identify one person in our community who is involved in this central in these conversations. this is not necessarily a bad thing. in the parity that has now been established, and it is of the law of the land. but i still get a

>> i intend to reach out to senator conrad and get more specifics from them. where we live in the midwest, the idea of co-ops is not unusual. i like to see what they're thinking about. it depends on how independent the co-ops are allowed to be. whether they are reasonable competitor or not. the very same people on this debate that said there would not be enough competitors are the same people when we added prescription drugs to medicare said it would not be enough competitors. those same people, the day that program started said, now there are too many competitors, people not be able to choose. it you do not want to underestimate the marketplace dynamics, the kinds of things that were just mentioned. if you expand family coverage to people just out of school who have not yet found a job, that includes insurance to keep them on family coverage lager, that is 7 million. if you make it more likely people have insurance at work sign up for it, that is 10 million. suddenly, you are taking big chunks of numbers out of the government responsibility and putting them b

a couple of months ago i called in and got senator conrad. mentioned this to him. he was talking. i didn't get the chance to finish about w him, but he said, well, i'm supporting the fair tax which you're familiar with. and i said to him, you know -- and now he's talking about a vat tax and all of this stuff. actually, everything, health care, all of this stuff, will never, ever get taken care of until we change the tax code. now the reason i mention that is this. they talk about lobbyists. and a lot of americans don't understand that a lobbyist gets paid hundreds of thousands of dollars on k street. the corporation that pay them, then write that off against their tax liability which ends up with us having these little things put in the tax code that really affects us. we don't even know it. guest: i agree. i am a big advocate of the flat tax. in terms of what it will do for news exports in terms of how it will normalize our taxes. the more you consume, the more you will pay. i think, look, we have a tax code that nobody knows, even the i.r.s. doesn't know. they don't even give th

you don't get your way of no government involvement [inaudible] >> i intend to reach out to senator conrad and others and get more specifics from them and where we live in the midwest the idea of co-ops is not an unusual idea. i would like to see what they are thinking about there. it depends how independent they are allowed to be, whether they would be a reasonable competitor or not. but remember, the very same people in had debate who were saying there won't be enough competitors were the same people when we added prescription drugs to medicare who said there wouldn't be enough competitors and those people most of them the day that program started said there are too many competitors, people won't be able to choose. i think the marketplace, you don't want to underestimate the marketplace dallas. you don't want to underestimate the kinds of of things that mr. camp just mentioned. if you expand family coverage to people who are just out of school who haven't yet found a job that includes insurance to keep tell on family coverage, that is seven million. if you made it more likely that people

so that is i think if on philosophy and i think the suggestion by senator conrad which doesn't yet have any meat on the bones of a cooperative may make an awful lot of sense. we tried a lot of us in this is my final point in my remarks in both the house and the senate to move association health plans which is a form of a co-op and we never could quite get there and couldn't quite get there because we never could get enough votes because of the philosophical difference between a private solution and public solution which is ultimately really the dividing line in this piece of legislation, but on that point as a businessman i employ 250 people and a thousand salespeople. by salespeople were independent contractors which by federal law you cannot provide health benefits to them under the irs for in an apparent contractor but you can for an employee. i have seen nothing yet your have i heard under pay or play an independent contractors and those who they work for are going to be affected by this legislation but i will tell you this. probably 16 to 17 million of the uninsured in america are

debate, should there be a government sponsored health plan, should go the route of something kent conrad of north dakota has talked about a co-op idea and again for a regional or state based and federal seed money and a lot operate and nonprofit level at that level. i think this is just a huge discussion point, did you have a government plan, do you need a government plan, would it be an unfair competitor or a fair competitor -- that is into the payment rates and all sorts of things and as people follow the debates they need to be reading and thinking about that. >> host: talk about one of the ways of paying by taxing employer health-care benefits. explain that. >> guest: right now you get health insurance from your employer and it is not taxed, and it is an expense for the employer so they don't have to pay taxes and you don't have to pay taxes as part of taxable income in the idea is that costs the federal treasury billions a year. so if they looked at the level a bit of those benefits and decided to tax at a certain level or decided to tax people of a certain income tax on the health

one of the plans that started to gain traction in the finance committee is this proposal by senator conrado sort of create a health care cooperative instead of doing what everyone is calling the public government run option. do you see that really gaining any traction broadly amongst republicans? obviously there are a handful that appear interested. but in terms of the republican conference in general? >> why is it being proposed? there are basically two reasons. for those on the left -- and this is acknowledged. i'm a conservative republican for anybody who doesn't know here. i think i'm being absolutely objective here when i say everyone acknowledges that there are a lot of people on the left who want a single payor system run by the government or a government run insurance company that substitutes for that in effect. and that's the idea behind and the president wants this, too. he wants this government run they call it an option but a government run insurance company that frankly would be as it's been described so profrl that it could compete or outcompete the private insurance companie

to quote senator conrad, the chairman of the budget committee, a person i greatly admire on issues of fiscal policy, the debt is the threat. and it is. it is a threat to our nation. it's a threat to our young people because they will inherit this massive obligation. to pay for costs which are being expended today. and there's a lot of reasons why the debt is going up radically primarily, though, it's spending. it is quite simply spending. spending of the federal government guess if the traditional live of level of 20% of g.d.p. which it has been at for 40 years and that will jump under president obama's proposal up to 25% and 26% of g.d.p. in the short run, obviously, revenues are a factor because we're in a recessionary period but in the long run what is driving the deficit, what's driving this massive increase of debt which will be unsustainable, is spending. well, the congress has a chance the next couple of days to do a small part but a significant part in the way of a public statement and in the way about statement of policy that we're concerned about the debt, we have a chance t

government-response red plan like medicare or if it's some other plan, a cooperative, which senator conrad has proposed, it really says let's take the profit out it and see if we can move toward the best health care outcomes and see if we can reduce the costs of health insurance so this we get a good medical outcome at a reasonable cost. some have come to the floor and criticized that idea. i think they're wrong. i take a look at the medicare system 45 years after we enacted it, it's been an unqualified success. just look at how long seniors are living because they have good medical care after they reach the age of 65. it isn't a question of whether you're rich or poor. and i've run into people in my state of illinois, a woman, a realtor who said to me in harrisburg, illinois, she said, senator, i want you to meet me. i'm 64 years old and never had health insurance one day in my life. i couldn't believe that. she said, next year i'm 65 and i'm going to have medicare and finally i can breathe easier knowing that the savings that i have put together won't be wiped out by a trip to the doctor